Ex-Pontypool RFC player one of two jailed after brutal attack on takeaway delivery driver and stamping on party-goer

TWO men who attacked a takeaway delivery driver before assaulting two others at a party have been jailed for a total of 17 years and eight months.

Former Pontypool RFC player Adam Banfield, aged 28, of George Street, Pontypool, and Nathan Williams, 30, of Grove Crescent, Trevethin, had taken drugs and were walking in the middle of the road past K2 Star Kebab in Pontypool on the night of September 28 last year.

A car driven by Armaan Quadri somehow came into contact with Banfield, who then subjected the driver to a “sustained and brutal” assault inside and outside his vehicle, Cardiff Crown Court heard yesterday.

Recorder Judge Simon Mills said Mr Quadri, the director of the India Garden takeaway in Garndiffaith, was repeatedly punched and kicked by both men including while on the ground, and suffered a broken arm and bruises during the attack, which was witnessed by onlookers and partly captured on CCTV.

By the time Banfield and Williams arrived at a party some time later, the news of their behaviour had spread and they were asked to leave.

Williams then punched and kicked a man, Daniel Black, breaking bones in both sides of his jaw, while Banfield stamped on Mr Black’s brother Aaron causing multiple bruises.

Later Banfield telephoned Aaron Black and subjected him to what the judge described as “unpleasant bullying and disturbing threats peppered with abuse”. Prosecutor Jeffrey Jones said Banfield had accused Mr Black of being a “grass” and threatened to kill him, before calling him again several hours later to apologise.

The pair were arrested three days later on October 1 and in police interview claimed self-defence, before later admitting all charges.

Of the attack on Mr Quadri, the judge said the pair “had no business” walking in the road, and that there was no suggestion Mr Quadri had been driving in an improper manner.

Judge Mills said: “It was instinctive, pack-like behaviour.

“Your first reaction was to attack this man who had done nothing wrong.”

David Elias, mitigating for Banfield, who was subject to two court orders for assaulting an ex-partner at the time of the offences, said his behaviour had been “shameful and appalling”, but insisted the defendant can be a useful member of society.

Huw Wallace, for Williams, said he had gone 10 years without committing acts of violence, but had started drinking following the breakdown of a relationship, and wished to apologise to the victims.

Banfield, who has been on remand for eight months, was sent to jail for seven years and four months for grievous bodily harm against Mr Quadri.

He was also sentenced to 16 months consecutive for assault occasioning actual bodily harm against Aaron Black, and four months consecutive for intimidating him, totalling nine years.

Williams was sentenced to six years and eight months in jail for the attack on Mr Quadri, and two years consecutively for the assault on Daniel Black, totalling eight years eight months.

Comments

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.jerymp

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Score: 12

jerymp
10:29am Wed 2 Jul 14

jerymp wrote…

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.

[quote][p][bold]jerymp[/bold] wrote:
Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.[/p][/quote]Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.jerymp

jerymp wrote…

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.

Score: 8

DDDog1
10:57am Wed 2 Jul 14

jerymp wrote…

jerymp wrote…

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.

Let's hope not

[quote][p][bold]jerymp[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jerymp[/bold] wrote:
Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.[/p][/quote]Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.[/p][/quote]Let's hope notDDDog1

jerymp wrote…

jerymp wrote…

Who will be locked up for 17 years 8 months then?
Usual silly inaccurate headline.

Meant to add that banfield will probably be out in less than three years.

Let's hope not

Score: 29

displayed
11:29am Wed 2 Jul 14

'said his behaviour had been “shameful and appalling”, but insisted the defendant can be a useful member of society.'

What as a hired thug, "yeh ill break a few a bones for ya, it'll cost ya tho"!
Yeh rite!

"Williams then punched and kicked a man, Daniel Black, breaking bones in both sides of his jaw, while Banfield stamped on Mr Black’s brother Aaron causing multiple bruises. Later Banfield telephoned Aaron Black".

Howd he get his no.......

"for Williams, said he had gone 10 years without committing acts of violence, but had started drinking following the breakdown of a relationship"
Oh, so that makes it alrite then............

'said his behaviour had been “shameful and appalling”, but insisted the defendant can be a useful member of society.'
What as a hired thug, "yeh ill break a few a bones for ya, it'll cost ya tho"!
Yeh rite!
"Williams then punched and kicked a man, Daniel Black, breaking bones in both sides of his jaw, while Banfield stamped on Mr Black’s brother Aaron causing multiple bruises. Later Banfield telephoned Aaron Black".
Howd he get his no.......
"for Williams, said he had gone 10 years without committing acts of violence, but had started drinking following the breakdown of a relationship"
Oh, so that makes it alrite then............displayed

'said his behaviour had been “shameful and appalling”, but insisted the defendant can be a useful member of society.'

What as a hired thug, "yeh ill break a few a bones for ya, it'll cost ya tho"!
Yeh rite!

"Williams then punched and kicked a man, Daniel Black, breaking bones in both sides of his jaw, while Banfield stamped on Mr Black’s brother Aaron causing multiple bruises. Later Banfield telephoned Aaron Black".

Howd he get his no.......

"for Williams, said he had gone 10 years without committing acts of violence, but had started drinking following the breakdown of a relationship"
Oh, so that makes it alrite then............

Score: 24

displayed
5:31pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Pc p o l i c e out there again.......

Pc p o l i c e out there again.......displayed

Pc p o l i c e out there again.......

Score: -4

corpardguy
6:15pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Will this change the life style and/or patterns of abusive violence?
Probably got a bigger chip on their collective shoulders now. I don't pretend to know the answer but prison only helps by keeping them off the street for a while (a good thing and certainly a punishment). But.... what happens after release?

Will this change the life style and/or patterns of abusive violence?
Probably got a bigger chip on their collective shoulders now. I don't pretend to know the answer but prison only helps by keeping them off the street for a while (a good thing and certainly a punishment). But.... what happens after release?corpardguy

Will this change the life style and/or patterns of abusive violence?
Probably got a bigger chip on their collective shoulders now. I don't pretend to know the answer but prison only helps by keeping them off the street for a while (a good thing and certainly a punishment). But.... what happens after release?

Score: 6

Katie Re-Registered
6:19pm Wed 2 Jul 14

I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.

I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.Katie Re-Registered

I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.

Score: 3

Limestonecowboy
9:05pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Why look for a reason to justify their behaviour drink was a factor nobody forced it down their necks they're simply violent thugs lets not burden NHS further.

Why look for a reason to justify their behaviour drink was a factor nobody forced it down their necks they're simply violent thugs lets not burden NHS further.Limestonecowboy

Why look for a reason to justify their behaviour drink was a factor nobody forced it down their necks they're simply violent thugs lets not burden NHS further.

Score: 10

k12345
9:46pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Katie Re-Registered wrote…

I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.

Unfortunately these two are not mentally unwell but just pure thugs! Prison is the better option where they can be monitored & given help although a leopard never changes his spots! Granted the sentences are too lenient as they've already appeared several times in this newspaper for this type of behaviour!! How many more times?

[quote][p][bold]Katie Re-Registered[/bold] wrote:
I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately these two are not mentally unwell but just pure thugs! Prison is the better option where they can be monitored & given help although a leopard never changes his spots! Granted the sentences are too lenient as they've already appeared several times in this newspaper for this type of behaviour!! How many more times?k12345

Katie Re-Registered wrote…

I can't believe the sentences are so lenient - not to mention short-sighted. It's plain to see that these two attackers are need to be kept at a secure mental health institution until psychiatrists have ascertained that they are no longer likely to launch unprovoked violent attacks on innocent members of the public. Sadly, I see an even greater tragedy taking place unless their psychological issues are adequately dealt with.

Unfortunately these two are not mentally unwell but just pure thugs! Prison is the better option where they can be monitored & given help although a leopard never changes his spots! Granted the sentences are too lenient as they've already appeared several times in this newspaper for this type of behaviour!! How many more times?

Score: 17

pmclass
12:54pm Thu 3 Jul 14

pure scumbags. at least the streets are a bit safer for the next few years

pure scumbags. at least the streets are a bit safer for the next few yearspmclass

pure scumbags. at least the streets are a bit safer for the next few years

Score: 8

MYNAME1
2:01pm Fri 4 Jul 14

The drivers car somehow came into contact with one of them, i think not, i wasnt there but i can tell you what happened. They were both walking down the road when this driver came up from behind beeped his horn , i expect, they took exception to this and beat the living daylights out of him cos they are hard and are not to be beeped at. The two they gave a hiding to are just as bad as them and would probably to the same to some innocent guy who didnt deserve it as weel, so i got no sympathy for them, too many people roll around thinking they're king s**t nowdays and do not care

The drivers car somehow came into contact with one of them, i think not, i wasnt there but i can tell you what happened. They were both walking down the road when this driver came up from behind beeped his horn , i expect, they took exception to this and beat the living daylights out of him cos they are hard and are not to be beeped at. The two they gave a hiding to are just as bad as them and would probably to the same to some innocent guy who didnt deserve it as weel, so i got no sympathy for them, too many people roll around thinking they're king s**t nowdays and do not careMYNAME1

The drivers car somehow came into contact with one of them, i think not, i wasnt there but i can tell you what happened. They were both walking down the road when this driver came up from behind beeped his horn , i expect, they took exception to this and beat the living daylights out of him cos they are hard and are not to be beeped at. The two they gave a hiding to are just as bad as them and would probably to the same to some innocent guy who didnt deserve it as weel, so i got no sympathy for them, too many people roll around thinking they're king s**t nowdays and do not care

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here